While I cannot make the case that universal health care is a right, I certainly can make the case that it is in the public interest to see to it that such needs are met. Jericon’s point on this question is well taken.

They’ve lost anyway. Actually those greedy bastards at corporate HQ have set this up. Now they are making the working schedules by computer to ensure that the workers have only the amount of hours I mentioned to offset the new act.

Are any of their rivals any better though? A lot of these outfits aren’t exactly keen to advertise the fact if they’re not. There’s a Shlotzky’s Deli right next to the Applebees where I live. If they’re stand up guys about this, I may just go there next time I take Mum out and let them know why.

Signature

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

Are any of their rivals any better though? A lot of these outfits aren’t exactly keen to advertise the fact if they’re not. There’s a Shlotzky’s Deli right next to the Applebees where I live. If they’re stand up guys about this, I may just go there next time I take Mum out and let them know why.

We have a Shlotzky’s here too and their sandwiches are delicious, not to mention that you can see just how they are fixed but I have no idea how they treat their employees. As a general rule though most restaurant workers from the front of the house (waitresses and greeters) to the back (fry cooks, broilers, dish tankers etc.) are treated abut the same, especially in the larger corporations. You may remember Long John Silvers fish and chips store? The pilot store was in Lexington and my friends and I ate there the year it opened. A British restaurateur and his friend started it, just one store. the quality of the food was high then. We met him, and his idea was to see if it would catch on here and it did. They later sold the business and when it became a mega corporation, costs were cut by selling in bulk, the quality of the food went to hell and the cycle began, low wages, no benefits and crap food. I don’t want to harp on this but it happens to every restaurant after massive expansion and the corporate bosses take control of the product. It stops being about people and becomes a race for profit only.

Yeah…we have one here in my hometown which is combined with an A&W franchise…which I might point out is no better in terms of quality.

A lot of the fast food operations are in trouble for the very simple reason that they forgot what it was which made them so wildly successful in the first place, which was food which tasted good and which was served super fast.

It may not have been what one called “Good for you,” but if I’m eating out, I don’t care about that. If I want to graze, I can nuke some alfalfa sprouts at home, toss some vinigret on it and call it solved.

Seems to me a lot of megecorps are forgetting that what made them great was getting quality people and making sure that they had a pay and benefits package worthy of their knowladge and skill.

Signature

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

Seems to me a lot of megecorps are forgetting that what made them great was getting quality people and making sure that they had a pay and benefits package worthy of their knowladge and skill.

I think part of the problem is that when these franchises go public they are now only beholden to their shareholders whose bottom line is to make a profit from the company and they don’t give a damn how this is done, as long as I get my share so to speak. That’s where quantity and cost cutting begins and that’s when the quality is sacrificed along with the workers. who wants to remain loyal to a faceless corporation that screws you on wages and benefits? also, If it wasn’t for the FDA you would be fed dog food and not know it. In fact, after testing the meat used by Taco Bell, it was found to be one step from dogfood with an infusion of bone meal. We joke about what goes into fast food, soy burgers etc. but concern is growing especially as to diet. In this area it’s fat, salt and sugar on practically everything but it sells and it’s cheap. Once again, quantity over quality.

I heard an story on NPR the other day that Europeans had found that much of the hamburger they’d been buying was adulterated with pork and horse. Pretty heavily too. You’d think Yahweh or Allah would have let their people know. Apparently horse is good for you anyway, less fat, more protein.

The discussion about food versus profit raises a question: Does the capitalist system do a good job accounting for intangible value? I don’t really have an answer, but the phenomenon of the millionaire franchise owner selling lowest acceptable quality food contrasted to to the failing individual chef/restaurant providing the best food they can make seems worth looking at. Does this system not reward quality endeavors or even undermine them? I don’t really have an answer, or even a strong opinion, but I regret seeing quality and integrity struggle and so often fail. And, the initial post raises a question about how capitalism values service.

And, the initial post raises a question about how capitalism values service.

I could say the same for just about any other economic system out there. Communism and some variants of socialism sound terrific in priciple but don’t measure up any better then capitalism in actual practice.

Is this the fault of any of those systems in and of themselves?

I don’t think so.

Any system can work if the people who use it are reasonably honest, but the problem is that not everybody is. Even worse, the ones who rise to the top in any of these systems are rarely the idealists and the visionaries but the ruthless robber baron types.

Signature

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

You’re right, I didn’t really mean to pick on capitalism, in many ways it seems to be the best system we have come up with, although when it it mixed with a careful socialist ethic it seems like it might be better for the majority than the unbridled version. It may just be that the esthetes will always suffer from the passions of the masses. And, I don’t mean to say that the masses are wrong in their tastes, that’s not a judgement I would make. And, I suppose people who value wealth above ethics, esthetics, or quality are very powerful because of their stripped down moral sense. I was just hoping someone else would have a better answer than me, one I could get embrace with more enthusiasm.
..

The problem is not with capitalism, but with uncontrolled capitalism. The idea of offering rewards for innovation and work makes sense. However, the amount of reward should be strictly limited, and the distribution of rewards should be distributed among all the workers according to the value they contribute. We need laws to guide capitalism away from greed and unfairness. We get them periodically, then a different political party gets control and rescinds them.

the distribution of rewards should be distributed among all the workers according to the value they contribute.
Occam

Well there in lies the rub as they say. Who decides that? All workers could argue that they contributed something but obviously some contributed an enormous amount to the success of the company through their creativity and insight. They may have a talent that is rare and only possessed by a few and should be rewarded accordingly. Others made a small contribution by providing better service. Not a rare talent but perhaps not a universal one either. Still others did little more than keep a seat warm. Each will have exaggerated views of his own worth and less so of the worth of others.

The current free market system allows the company to reward each worker according to what they see as that workers contribution. I’m not sure that I can see a mechanism whereby this could be done more fairly if merit and contributions are the main considerations. You could of course force a company to take from those who have more and give to those who have less out of proportion to their real worth to the company but I’m not sure if that’s fair or even desirable, especially if the high value worker has the option of picking up and going to another company where is talents might be better compensated. We are a global market after all.

Signature

For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, obvious,.... and just plain wrong

Aside from the ethical issues, (I’m completely on the worker’s side), I think I’d avoid eating at a place where the staff have little or no access to health care simply because the idea of someone with untreated TB or hepatitis preparing my salad kind of messes with my appetite. If people can’t see universal access to healthcare as a right, maybe they could at least see it as an asset to society, like a fire department or public water and sewer systems.

LL. Problem is there are many capitalists (they like to call themselves capitalists, but we all know they’re Republicans) in our midst to whom such an idea as something being an asset to society at large is anathema, especially if they think they’ll have to pay for anyone else to benefit from it. They’d rather eat contaminated salad than create a decent society. Someone once said a Republican can enjoy a good meal only if he knows someone is starving. I think that’s right on the money. It should be expanded to ” . . . only if he knows the workers can’t get health care.”

“The current free market system allows the company to reward each worker according to what they see as that workers contribution.”

“Each will have exaggerated views of his own worth and less so of the worth of others.”

And the result is a CEO making over 500 times the wages of an average worker.

Someone once told me about the “neighbor test” to assess whether an action is ethical. Basically, if you’d do it to your next door neighbor it’s probably ethical, (if you’re not some sort of sociopath).

I have no idea how to instill or teach empathy to other people, and probably even less perspective of the validity of my own sense of empathy. Perhaps it is the individuals obligation to demand their humanity be recognized. That’s a heavy burden for the underprivileged to have to assume. Still, that seems to be the history of the human race, in political rebellion or labor strife. If you want to someone to recognize you as an equal there is no argument as persuasive as placing a knife against that persons neck.

And the result is a CEO making over 500 times the wages of an average worker.

I understand what you are saying but the CEO is also in a position to have an impact on the company’s bottom line that may be thousands of times greater than that of the average worker for better or worse. Because of that a company is willing to pay far more to get the best CEO than it is to get the best line worker for a given position or the best supervisor.

It may not seem fair but as I said, we are part of a global economy and if government were to step in and stop companies from bidding top dollar for the most successful CEO’s than someone else will. That will put our companies at a disadvantage and the average workers job in jeopardy.

I think society would be far better off if we could change that formula but I just don’t see any way to reduce that disparity in wages without affecting our ability to compete.

Signature

For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, obvious,.... and just plain wrong

Aside from the ethical issues, (I’m completely on the worker’s side), I think I’d avoid eating at a place where the staff have little or no access to health care simply because the idea of someone with untreated TB or hepatitis preparing my salad kind of messes with my appetite. If people can’t see universal access to healthcare as a right, maybe they could at least see it as an asset to society, like a fire department or public water and sewer systems.

LL. Problem is there are many capitalists (they like to call themselves capitalists, but we all know they’re Republicans) in our midst to whom such an idea as something being an asset to society at large is anathema, especially if they think they’ll have to pay for anyone else to benefit from it. They’d rather eat contaminated salad than create a decent society. Someone once said a Republican can enjoy a good meal only if he knows someone is starving. I think that’s right on the money. It should be expanded to ” . . . only if he knows the workers can’t get health care.”

You hate life too much, Lois.

Also, republicans probably wouldn’t eat salads, it’s too frilly.

Signature

“I am back from Syria. I believe I have enlightened ISIS to the error of their ways. They are all vegan now.” - Godfrey Elfwick